Sources

542 sources

Source

Rubin et al. (2011)

How Do I Remember That I Know You Know That I Know?

Psychological Science, 22(12), 1574-1582

Find It

DOI

Abstract

Communication is aided greatly when speakers and listeners take advantage of mutually shared knowledge (i.e., common ground). How such information is represented in memory is not well known. Using a neuropsychological-psycholinguistic approach to real-time language understanding, we investigated the ability to form and use common ground during conversation in memory-impaired participants with hippocampal amnesia. Analyses of amnesics’ eye fixations as they interpreted their partner’s utterances about a set of objects demonstrated successful use of common ground when the amnesics had immediate access to common-ground information, but dramatic failures when they did not. These findings indicate a clear role for declarative memory in maintenance of common-ground representations. Even when amnesics were successful, however, the eye movement record revealed subtle deficits in resolving potential ambiguity among competing intended referents; this finding suggests that declarative memory may be critical to more basic aspects of the on-line resolution of linguistic ambiguity.

Reference

Rubin, R. D., Brown-Schmidt, S., Duff, M. C., Tranel, D., & Cohen, N. J. (2011). How Do I Remember That I Know You Know That I Know?. Psychological Science, 22(12), 1574-1582. https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797611418245

What Rests on This

2 mechanisms cite this source. Each finding below is quoted as it appears on that mechanism's own page.

Partner Model Representational Structures

  • Neural substrate

    Eye-tracking showed that amnesic patients used common ground successfully when the shared information was immediately available but failed dramatically when it had to be retrieved from memory, pointing to a role for hippocampal declarative memory in maintaining common ground

Standing Constraints Memory Processes

  • Neural substrate

    Five patients with hippocampal amnesia used information shared with a conversation partner normally when it had just been mentioned, but failed markedly after a filled delay of about 40 seconds, compared with five matched comparison participants, implicating declarative memory in keeping partner-specific knowledge available